will fly the coop for turkey day. >> all that plus what dexter and honey boo boo. this is going to be good. another day, another bizarre development tied to the scandal that brought down david petraeus. not talking about benghazi. like many powerful men before him, it took a sex scandal to bring him down. and now another top military official might be fallout. it just keeps getting bigger. did you hear congress is in town? it's the first day back since september 21st. that's a lifetime in politics. who was president? keep in mind, today counts as one of only 16 working days on

the congressional calendar for the rest of the year. i want that schedule. that means this congress, which has done arguably little in the past 20 months now has 16 days to get over the gridlock. congressional leaders will start h hammering out a way forward. the the president has already met today with labor leaders and aflcio president had this to say when leaving the white house. >> we're very, very committed to making sure that the middle class and workers don't end up paying the tab for a party that we didn't get to go to. and the president is committed to that as well. >> we start today with politico's senior congressional reporter. so 16 days, how much should we realistically expect to get accomplished? >> that's been the question all yearlong, how little can congress do? i think the very likely scenario here is some sort of end of the

year punt. there's not much time. next week is thanksgiving. there are huge issues that have divided the parties for the better part of a generation. there's no closer to a deal other than maybe some of the rhetoric. but we have not really seen the details. so what really it seems right here that if they do reach an agreement, it will be something in which they have to fill in the details next year and some sort of process in which they would get to the point next year e. so that could be at the end of the day just another kick the can down the road. >> you have a new piece up on politico i want to talk to you about. it's about rand paul. you talk about him taking a leadership role in corralling republicans around a softer message. things like looser marijuana restrictions and penalties, immigration reform, and less ha hawkish foreign policy. i think the president is hawkish enough. i have talked to rand paul a

number of times, but does he have the influence within the gop to get much of that done? i imagine moderates in the party will look at him with some skepticism and then, of course, his tea party friends won't take too kindly to him abandoning their messages. is he really the guy for this? >> he sees that. this is a demographic problem for the republican party. what he said is, look. we have done well in the south, but we haven't done well in the west, in the northeast, and we haven't done well in the great lakes areas. we are a party that has support from the tea party conservatives, but he feels really strongly they need to broaden that message out to bring in a lot of younger voters, folks who supported his father's libertarian torch and rand paul wants to carry that torch as well.

so look, he sees an opportunity to broaden the party's appeal to that demographic because, as we saw last week, that went heavily for the fuel. that took back the senate. if there's an effort to show moderation and compromise, that could appeal to those groups. he's the guy who says, i can consider it and a lot of my members of my party should as well. >> rand paul wants to talk about marijuana legislation and rand paul may not be the guy who is strong enough or old enough to push this through. let's push aside from rand specifically and talk about the potential of marijuana reform. revolutionary things going on in washington and colorado. generally people in the media laugh as if they just smoked a joint when we talk about marijuana, but this is a serious part of ending the war on drugs. but the federal government has to get involved. it's not a state by state thing.

what's the likelihood of congress taking up seriously the idea of marijuana reform and legalization? >> that's very little aps in the presidential leadership. this has to be something that the president pushes. because democratic leaders here are still a little skiddish about this issue, even if it's picking up some support in key states. republican leaders certainly are not anywhere near that point. that's whey rand paul has floated an idea that could potentially get some support. the idea of eliminating mandatory minimum sentences for folks who are first time offenders and those who possess marijuana. even that getting through is a hurdle given the political climate here. really it's going to come down to whether or not that leaders in congress want to do it. whether or not the president wants to stake political capital. right now, no one is showing much willingness to do that. >> getting back to the standoff between republicans in congress

and president obama, i wanted to ask about the meeting that took place today. you had labor leaders there. they have said in an interview if medicare and social security are part of any deal that president obama strikes with republicans, labor will be against it. and i look at that and i say, how can that not be part of any deal that obama strikes with republicans? how much trouble will he have on the left selling any deal he reaches? >> it's going to be hard to sell. any deal that deals with those entitlement issues. harry reid said clearly here, social security, we will not touch social security as part of this package. so it's probably going to end upcoming down to e medicare and medicaid. if the president starts to negotiate on those issues because he'll have to do some of that in order to get republicans support on taxes. even mitch mcconnell went to the

floor and said, i will consider higher revenues, but the president has to agree to something on entitlements. so the question is, if he does do something, how many democrats can the president bring on board because as you mentioned, the le left, a lot of folks are concerned. people who campaigned for this president don't want him to be throwing him under the bus. >> speaking of the liberal wing of the democratic party, what are you hearing about nancy pelosi's future? >>. she's being mum on that right now. she said tomorrow morning by 10:00 a.m., we'll all know her decision. some of that may leak out beforehand. but right now, she's gauging whether or not she has the political support to keep the control of her spot atop the democratic leadership. she's not saying one way or the other she will stand on board or the democrat from maryland, her number two would assume as the top democratic leader. >> i know the election was a long time ago, but i just wanted

to refresh everyone's memories a little bit about what we were talking about in the election. >> i need to know that they should focus on creating jobs and growing the economy. >> we have a jobs crisis. >> we're going to create one million new manufacturing jobs. we're going to train two million workers. >> the answer isn't government. the answer is more good jobs. >> what happened to jobs? when are we going to talk about jobs? >> it's really funny because during the campaign trail, both romney and the president they voided the whole fiscal cliff. there was little talk about what washington will have to do. here we are and have to deal with the major issues that could have a negative impact on the economy. the people who were pushing big deficit packages, even the business communities say, if we get a deal, that would be good for the economy and grow jobs. but if there are tax increases,

that could set the economy back. something the cbi warns if nothing happens could send the economy back into recession. the message in washington is how do we avert this crisis. it's not how are we going to create jobs right now. >> i guess we'll have to wait a little longer. thank you. up next, bizarre doesn't cut it. a shirtless fbi agent, another top general and 30,000 pages of e-mails and documents. the new twists and turns in the spy scandal as we roll on, tuesday, november 13th. free app

that makes watching tv even better. if your tv were a hot dog zeebox would be some sort of fancy, french mustard. when they magically unite, people would think, "woah, this two dollar hot dog tastes like a fancy eight dollar hot dog." download zeebox free, and say "woah" every time you watch tv.

the already bizarre petraeus scandal took a weirder turn today adding to the cast of real housewives military space. when john allen was ree vealed is also being investigated for his link to one of the women involved. stay with me here. pentagon officials say there are 20, 30,000 pages of e-mails and documents between allen and jill kelley, the woman who report the she was receiving anonymous e e-mails that were determined to have come from paula broadwell. really? again? the most powerful military force in the world is being taken out by an inbox? really? what happened did you forget your myspace password? really? >> and general allen, 30,000 e-mails? what could you have possibly

said in the last 29,990 others that you didn't say in the first ten. >> really? 30,000. where did you find the time? i eat breakfast, come to work, blink and it's time for the show. really? >> no wonder it took us so long to catch bin laden. these guys were probably waiting for him to check in on four square. really? >> really? and don't think you're getting off easy here jill kelley. you tell someone about weird e-mails you're getting and you don't think someone might check your e e-mails? really? it's the fbi. you dent think they are going to follow up? have you never watched an episode of any show ever? really? >> and really unnamed fbi agent, you became obsessed with a woman while investigating her in an e-mail scandal and then e-mailed

her shirtless photos. really? weiner, chris lee, brett favre, it's 2012. it's time to recognize the male physique carries zero allure. stop sending us pictures of it. >> don't you watch "homeland"? that show is this exact story line. i defy you to find one happy character in that whole show. no really. go ahead. >> really? >> really. defend your gender. >> that's pretty good. >> i used to write novels and sometimes i look at things that happen in life and it's like if you put that in a novel. and i was doing magic realism. even in a novel, this would not work. it would not be believable. you can't help but mwonder if a modern shakespeare who would write this novel.

i would imagine it would be a combination of e.l. james meets tom clancy and write "50 shades of red october." it would look really cool. >> i would read that. >> even know you've already read it in "the new york times" and "washington post." it seems like we're tripping to the story like we have fallen into a bed hopping party and we think we're going to find something substantive and there's nothing substantive here at all. you wonder why this got out of the rem m of investigation and into like actual serious people's inboxes. like the president's inboxes. rachel maddow talking about this last night. >> the fbi investigation that turned up evidence of this affair turned up no evidence of breaching classified information or any other criminality. then why did it get reported to the director of national intelligence and the president? this was private misbehavior

that was a breach of cia personnel rules, but not the law. is the fbi the armed wing of the cia's human resources department now? >> the point she's making is the fbi did not find a crime. there was not an attempt to breach security on the part of paula or whoever. so it's sort of like, why did this trickle upward. you can't have a cia director who is fooling around, but -- >> bed hopping party maybe even closer to a key party. where couples go in and take each other's keys and go home with the other guy for the night. it's tawdry and gross. >> there's a culture involved since it seems to be one after another. >> only a couple people. >> but it begs the question. and certainly the fbi had to investigate to make sure there was no improper access of classification.

>> but they found nothing. there was no improper actions. >> and so i made the point. i can't remember who was who this was. this seems to be what we do when the economy is good in this country. >> we'll talk about sex any time. >> i'm not taking the blame for this story. >> i'm with you. i don't know what this is really about besides sex and frankly, i don't want to talk about it. >> it's the media's new shiny object. there's sex, there's spies, and important people. but there's nothing there beyond sex. >> i'm sure as the investigations continue, this might come up again. we'll have to see. >> but steve, in another sort of related area, john kerry originally was floated secretary of state. now it looks like he may be potentially a candidate for secretary of defense. >> this is a great segue. >> john kerry is not involved.

>> but he's a person who had sex in the past. so there's your segue. >> we're asking about john kerry. maybe there's an issue with leon panetta has to stay around for a few months because tough replace petraeus and all shuffling that has to go around. but eventually panetta is going to lead as defense secretary. but john kerry would be first in line to succeed him. what i find interesting is if it's true, it means the white house is not buying into the idea you can't pick john kerry because it opens up the senate seat and scott brown wins the senate seat. >> do you like kerry at defense as an idea? >> he's as qualified as anybody if he wants that. i just feel like if you want him for that job and you think he's a good match, don't be scared off by this guy.

>> 100% agree. >> if he's the right guy for the job, that's where he belongs. >> i tried to throw steve a life raft so you didn't have to talk about petraeus and you threw me right off. that was the ridiculous segue. any way, next up, we continue our series taking a look at the most pressing issues facing the country. this last conversation not being one of them. today the issue was one that affects every american's wallet. we're talking taxes. they are encouraging customers to shop local. they created lady's night in burbank, california, to boost sales by staying open late. make sure to support your local retailers on november 24th for the small business saturday. for more, watch "your business" on msnbc. [ female announcer ] a classic meatloaf recipe from stouffer's

starts with ground beef, unions, and peppers baked in a ketchup glaze with savory gravy and mashed russet potatoes. what makes stouffer's meatloaf best of all? that moment you enjoy it at home. stouffer's. let's fix dinner.

on top of the show this afternoon, president obama held the first in a series of meetings at the white house this week aimed at averting the fiscal cliff. gradual fiscal slope, while some think it's pleasant, new poll results show americans are

worried. 68% say the $600 billion in automatic tax increases and spending cuts would have a major effect on the u.s. economy. 44% say it would have a major effect on their own financial situation. and there's little confidence both sides can work together and find a compromise. only 38% say the president and congress will reach an agreement. as we continue to take a serious look at the issues facing the country, today the issue is taxes. we've got the alternative minimum tax, child tax credit, estate tax, it's a mess of taxes set to expire. what are we left to do when they do? let's bring in dan gross, columnist and global news editor for "daily beast." they talked about this democrats coming around to a romney/obama idea to raise taxes on the rich indirectly by capping deductions

at $35,000. third way likes the plan and says it could raise $1.3 trillion in ten years without raising rates, but they want to excluz charitable giving. what do you think about that plan? >> people say the democrats are terrible at negotiating, this is exhibit a. this was the romney plan. he was saying toward the end of his campaign, forget about cutting rates. we'll just cap deductions. then he lost and this centrist group says we'll take the romney plan. we are now in day seven of a hostage situation where if obama just does nothing, all these great tax cuts go away. so this idea being floated republicans and some democrats are putting it forward saying, okay, let's leave the marginal rates where they are. but we'll make the rich pay more by taking away their deductions. the problem is all the money in the deductions is in things like

the home mortgage deduction, which anybody who owns the house and the building and mortgage and banking industry desperately needs to stay intact. next is charitable donations. so somebody giving $50 million to the university. so the nonprofit sector would be freaked out by that. and the last one is companies that take a tax deduction for the health insurance premiums they pay and the entire health care industry is dependent on that too. so it's an attractive thing to say let's get rid of the dedubss, but the deductions where the money is are incredibly popular. >> i don't mean to interrupt the conversation, but it's important to point out what's important is it's how quickly top democrats reacted. thinking of one of the top democrats in the house who said we are open to this idea, but only if the bottom line is met. then we can talk about deductions on top of that. what struck me is the democrats ared a mapt that they are not

going to let that issue of the bush tax cuts go and have any substitutes at this point. >> this is kind of the mirrorage of what we saw in health care where the democrats would inch towards republicans and just y say, no, and go further to the right. you're seeing republicans coming towards the democrats saying we now concede the wealthy should pay more. we should not be talking about cutting taxes. they should pay more. the way to do it is by getting rid of deductions. then saying forget about it, it's nice you make the gesture. we can do some of that, but let's let the marginal tax rates go up, go back to where they were in 2001. now rubin is not part of the obama administration, but some people who are important members of the economic team are still his accolades. it's republicans saying we'll

come towards you and we have a democrat saying, that's nice, but we want that plus the marginal income rates to go higher on the wealthy. >> i want to resentence you. i'm going to read a sentence you wrote because it's a great sentence. >> he wants to hear that again. >> could you say that again? >> tricky, tricky. even if they were in a mood to make a deal, asking congressional republicans to sign off on a tax increase is like asking an orthodox jew to eat a lobster and bacon club sandwich on a saturday. brilliant, but what i want to talk about is who is the god that we're referring to there for congressional republicans? rush, grover, the spirit of the republican party? and we know that wouldn't happen, but you wouldn't write that if you didn't think there was a chance of that tax increase happening.

do you think we're going to get that in the end? >> i actually do. they are these taboos. if you're a republican, you didn't talk about the need for more revenues. we needed to do something about the deficit, but it all had to come from spending. the republicans got their way. remember the talks about boehner and the negotiations on the debt ceiling. he got 98% of what he wanted. so the conversation used to be we will cut the deficit through spending cuts. now within the space of a week, the same people, glen hubbard who was romney's chief economic adviser slated to be the federal reserve head if romney had won has an op-ed in the financial times today saying the first thing we should do is focus on more revenues and the way to get that is from capping deductions for the wealthy. so it's extraordinary the shape of the the rhetoric that's coming from republicans in the the last week has really changed a great deal. i think they recognize, even if

obama doesn't recognize and even if most centrist democrats don't recognize it, they hold all the cards here. >> so who's the god you're referring to there? >> grover norquist? i'd say it's more a collection of dayties who said the first -- >> but that's the point. republican leaders and some republican thought leaders might be coming around that we have a deal here. but the reason for the past two decades can be traced back to 1990 with george bush sr. put a tax hike deal together with democrats. what we found out was within the republican party and on the right there's a huge opening for would be leaders whether it's on talk radio to stand up and say i'm not going to be part of this conservative principles. i'm going to fight the

establishment. that's how newt gingrich became the top republican in the house. if you go down that road again, if they sign up for the deal, there's a huge opening for newt gingrich of this generation. i don't know who it is but to stand up and say -- it seems like there's a huge opening for a revolt on the right. >> it's entirely possible. but i think the stakes are so high. again, this kind of contraption where they tried to have the commission and couldn't agree on it. then they said we're going to have the automatic sequestration. now all the taxes go up. it was a badly-flawed structure, but it's brilliant politically for the democrats assuming they won because six weeks from now, the people are going to lose the low marginal rates they have enjoyed. the low capital gains rates they have enjoined for ten years. the estate tax, which is at an

extremely low rate, those are going to go up massively. so the question on the right has to be, if what we stand for as a party is lower taxes, especially on the wealthy, if we refuse to do a deal, we're not going to get there. we're going to get a lot of taxes. it's a question of somewhat higher taxes or much higher taxes. i think that may change the nature of the negotiation this time around. >> as i have been thinking about a potential sort of big deal that could be done and trying to wrap my head around it it, i have been trying to figure out what an overall framework would look like. i wanted to know if you had any thoughts. it was floated 3 to 1 spending cuts to increases in revenue. changes to social security and medicare, $1.2 trillion coming from the the tax code overall. simpson bowles, similar framework getting rid of some tax credits, adding gasoline

tax, more spending cuts. do you have any sense of what an overall framework, how big of a deal, what a ratio of cuts to revenue increases might look like, what the target they are aiming for would be? >> it's hard to wrap your mind around that. one of the ironies is the default option plus the rates going up is far to the left of anything that's been put out there. any of these things that the think tanks have done. >> except that it's a immediate deficit-cutting measure, which is not what the left wants. >> so far to the left on revenues and the amount of deficit reduction we get in year one is far higher than any of the other plans. which means once you're over the cliff, you have a lot of leeway to be generous and say, we don't need to cut spending so much. we can give some on taxes.

the simpson bowles plan, which people now seem to like, and particularly on the right are waking up, their baseline assumed that the bush tax cuts for those making above $250,000 would go away. that was their baseline assumption. when you hear lindsey graham saying i'm ready to embrace that, he's saying for people above $250,000, your tax rates are going to go up. i think whatever happens, whether there's a little bargain, a grand bargain or no bargain at all, because of the shape of washington after the election, it's going to mean that the wealthy are going to pay more. whether they pay more because of a higher marginal rate or a higher average rate due to less deductions they can take, and that's going to be the first focus rather than cutting spending and cutting entit entitlements on day one. >> dan gross, thank you. >> happy to be here. as 44 million get set to

take planes, trains and automobiles for the holidays, our next guest says that security designed to protect us is doing more harm than good. he'll explains, next. watch this. [ whoosh! ] [ man ] whoo-hoo! [ male announcer ] with reddi wip... that's so weird... [ whoosh! ] [ male announcer ] ...a slice of pie never sounded better. oh, yeah! [ male announcer ] that's because it's always made with real cream, never hydrogenated oil like some other whipped toppings. the sound of reddi wip... [ whoosh ]

...is the sound of joy. the sound of reddi wip... [ whoosh ] is bigger than we think ... sometimelike the flu.fer from with aches, fever and chills- the flu's a really big deal. so why treat it like it's a little cold? there's something that works differently than over-the-counter remedies. prescription tamiflu attacks the flu virus at its source. so don't wait. call your doctor right away. tamiflu is prescription medicine for treating the flu in adults and children one year and older whose flu symptoms started within the last two days. before taking tamiflu tell your doctor if you're pregnant, nursing. have serious health conditions, or take other medicines. if you develop an allergic reaction, a severe rash, or signs of unusual behavior, stop taking tamiflu and call your doctor immediately. children and adolescents in particular may be at an increased risk of seizures, confusion or abnormal behavior. the most common side effects are mild to moderate nausea and vomiting. the flu comes on fast, so ask your doctor about tamiflu. prescription for flu.

well, having a ton of locations doesn't hurt. and my daughter loves the santa. oh, ah sir. that is a customer. let's not tell mom. [ male announcer ] break from the holiday stress. fedex office. i used to run through airports. now i fly through them. with new number one express service, i fly nonstop from my plane to my car. without stopping at the counter. >> you can't do that anymore. not that any human could ever fly literally. you can't get through an airport quickly. today tsa officials announce 24 million people will fly for the the thanksgiving holiday and that will be 24 million people who get stuck in huge lines and get undressed and x-rayed and treated as if they are guilty until proven innocent.

does this activity actually make us safer? i have had the creeping suspicion it was like theater providing the illusion of security more than actual security. too simple to say there's been no attacks, so the system must be working. our next guest isn't so sure. harvey mollak is the of sociology, the offer of "against security." sir, did i get your name right? i think i got it wrong. >> mollotch. >> are we really making people safer with the security theater we have going on? or are we not really doing that? >> i think at best it's very ambiguous. i'm glad you showed footage of people waiting in line to go through security because that starts indicating one of the little contradictions, which is that often there are more people waiting to go through security

than will be on any plane. and those people have not yet been suspected of anything. so the security apparatus has assembled a target that in its particular form and size would otherwise not exist. >> that's right. if you're a terrorist at this point, why not just attack the airport instead of the airplane. we're not protecting the people waiting in line. there's a huge number of people, usually a lot of glass near them, it would be extraordinary easy to walk into an airport and set off something, we're not to say bomb in an airport, but easy to do that, right? >> just as there are many other places that there are gathered targets. we seem to think our terrorists only specialize in airports as opposed to the terrorists in the history of the world who set their sights on all kinds of settings. we focused overwhelmingly on the

airport. and anywhere elsewhere there's a turnstile like in the subways where it becomes plausible to set up an apparatus. so it's the plausibility of having the apparatus that stimulates the creation of the apparatus rather than, in my opinion, a realistic assessment of the probabilities. >> i recently started flying again for the first time after 16 years. i have a bit of a phobia. you're sitting on the plane and somebody gets up to use the bathroom, i have what i thought the thought that everybody has, potential shoe bomber, but it makes me wonder about that. this whole shoe bombing thing came because that was a loophole that after 9/11 the terrorists decided you can get on with a shoe. then we found out that's what they are doing, so we start inspecting shoes. then it's chemicals. now we have nothing over 6 ounces.

the newest one is we have the body scanners. the new wave of things to worry about. there will be a surgically implanted bomb inside somebody so the person can get through. it raises the question, are we just always going to be one step behind whatever the next innovation is in terrorist technology? >> we seem to be rubbing that way. but there are simple technolo technologies that we're way behind. so while we're inspecting people for their hair shampoo and other liquids and box cutters, once you're on the plane, it's just loaded with potential contraband. we know this from prisoners who invent and reinvent new weapons. the coca-cola can that the flight attendant brings around. it can be disassembled and made into a weapon. >> steve loves coca-cola. that's a real problem.

>> don't fly with coke. >> another 16 years now. >> we could bring down a plane with a coca-cola can? >> yes. you can take down a plane with a coca-cola can. . >> you're going to freak steve out. >> that was fun while it lasted. >> we seem focused on detecting weapons and if we could maybe take a lesson from the israelis and focus more on what they call the human factor. the former director of security says technology is not a comprehensive tool. it can detect weapons. if you don't develop procedures that go beyond technology, you're doomed to lose at the end of the day. >> a lot of our capacities have to do with intelligence. i should point out that no person in the united states with all of this huge apparatus we have has ever been stopped at

security who is then charged with a terrorist act. it's not just that they didn't do a terrorist act, but they were incriminated in a terrorist plot that then went to trial or proceeded forward. so we have that as the background. >> so we have never actually caught somebody in the the act? >> well, the flight attendants have caught people in the act. and it is in general people ordinary people and flight crews who fellow passengers and flight crews who successfully stop people from performing these terrorist acts. and they are our defense. that is we are each other's defense. >> but that means tsa has failed. >> i think that the tsa has done what organizations must do, which is that they are told you must do something. and even though it is not easy

or even plausible to do something, they have no choice but to do something. and we have since september 11th really done something. not just in the airports, but in the subway systems, the way we're rebuilding at ground zero. that's still another front. so the question is, how do you do something and i think that our methods have not been optimal at all. >> thank you, professor. up next, an article that caught our eye. you know, i was once used for small jobs.

yeah, and i took on all the bigger, tougher ones. but now that mr. clean's got this new select-a-size magic eraser, i mean, he can take on any size job. look how easily he gets things cleaned. it's enough to make you cry. you, specifically. not me. i'm just happy we don't go near rex's mobile home as often. because it's hard to clean or because you're scared of an itty-bitty doggy? [ dog barks ] aah! oh! [ clears throat ] yeah, that was a sneeze. i think i sprayed myself. [ male announcer ] new mr. clean select-a-size magic eraser. lets you pick the right size for every job.

steve? >> hi. don't mind me. i'm just reading my tv guide here, which is a little bigger than i remember it from my tv guide reading youth. they are out with their hot list for 2012. and i'm just perusing some of my favorite shows. we've got the hot to the end, "breaking bad." it's coming to an end. you've got "arrested development." hotly anticipated because it will be coming back in some kind of netflix form. "children's hospital", a funny show. i like that. we have another one here i can't find. and then "modern family."

a hot show. hot mama. and then look at this. i can't believe this. old. says the hot wonks. apparently they did something on us. it says msnbc's new daytime talk fest proves that you can disagree without being disagreeable unless your name is s.e. cupp. >> what? >> no, it doesn't say that. strong ratings and lively political chatter without too much finger pointing. >> without too much finger pointing. just some. >> just enough finger pointing. >> i have to say i loved -- as a kid we got the guide as we called it at home and do the cheers and jeers and all that. anybody in the country wants to know what time dog the bounty hunter is on is reading about us this week. that's pretty exciting. >> you are absolutely right, steve. i mean, i'm glad that list is actually really interesting. on point, modern family is still one of the best shows on

television. >> of course, we think it's on point. well done, tv guide. >> you have great taste. >> "breaking bad" is still one of the best shows on tv. when they say "breaking bad" hot to the end, i think the last season ever all time is coming next season and this year they had one of the best cliff hangers i have ever seen in television history. walter white has conquered the world, made more money than he could ever spend, he's vanquished all enemies, about to turn and walk out of the game and then his brother-in-law is on the john and he realizes who he is and fade to black, no, i need to see next season. >> i know. >> i'll be honest, i don't watch a lot of tv. it's either cable news for nick jr. in my household. there were two things i really liked. one is the grid. this like seeing this grid from tv guide, it gave me some very warm, fuzzy memories. right there. that brought back a lot of ferms for me. and the other thing i loved though is not only is s.e.

herself in tv guide, but s.e.'s doppelganger from "snl" kate mckinnon. >> she's on the hot list as well. >> you're bringing other women with you. >> or did she bring me? no one knows. >> steve kornacki brought you. >> steve kornacki brings everyone. the shows that i watch didn't make the list, unfortunately, like "duck dynasty," "top shot," but a show i do watch is "the newsro newsroom." i'm a consultant on the show. it's fun to watch about our industry. >> so in a way this whole segment has been about you. >> well, aren't they all? aren't they all? look, there i am again. >> is there anything else in here that we could talk about that relates to s.e.? >> i'm sure we can find something. >> all right, steve, stop reading.

>> i was supposed to give this -- i'm supposed to read this and not this. straight ahead, something i find hot, history. s.e.'s take on the party of lincoln and the modern gop civil war, but, first, another personal favorite, seinfeld" on tv guide. >> guess your boyfriend will have to catch the next train. >> he's not my boyfriend. >> he's not? interesting. >> elaine! >> guess your boyfriend is going to have to catch the next train. >> he's not my boyfriend. >> he's not? interesting. [ male announcer ] when was the last time something made your jaw drop? campbell's has 24 new soups that will make it drop over, and over again. ♪ from jammin' jerk chicken, to creamy gouda bisque. see what's new from campbell's. it's amazing what soup can do.

now's a good time to think about your options. are you looking for a plan that really meets your needs? and your budget? as you probably know, medicare only covers about 80% of your part b medical expenses. the rest is up to you. so consider an aarp medicare supplement insurance plan, insured by unitedhealthcare insurance company. like all standardized medicare supplement plans, they pick up some of what medicare doesn't pay. and could save you in out-of-pocket medical costs every year. call today to request a free decision guide. with this type of plan, you'll be able to visit any doctor or hospital that accepts medicare patients... plus, there are no networks, and you'll never need a referral to see a specialist. if you're thinking about your options, call today.

when you call, request your free decision guide. and find the aarp medicare supplement plan that may be right for you. to volunteer to help those in need. when a twinge of back pain surprises him. morning starts in high spirits, but there's a growing pain in his lower back. as lines grow longer, his pain continues to linger. but after a long day of helping others, he gets some helpful advice. just two aleve have the strength to keep back pain away all day. today, jason chose aleve. just two pills for all day pain relief. try aleve d for strong, all day long sinus and headache relief.

abolishing slavery settles the fate for the millions now in bond aage and unborn millions t come. >> it's that amendment or the confederate piece, you cannot have both. >> slavery, sir, it's done. >> president lincoln, one of my favorites, is a bona fide celebrity these days. he fights vampires, he gets the spielberg treatment, and enjoys regular shoutouts from our commander in chief. if he were alive today, he'd be on the cover of "people" every week. the affection is entirely deserved, of course, but i think republican as they attempt to pick up the pieces of their broken hearts can take a lesson from a lesser known president, one that barely gets any attention at all. james a. garfield served but 200 days in office. his term cut short by a lunatic assassin. inform "destiny of the republic"

he was nominated as the result of a civil war within the republican party, a war between the stalwarts and the half breeds at odds with republican leadership in the senate, his task was bringing the party together. when he is assassinated, republicans turned on each other calling for high rarnging stalwarts to be lynched in retribution. garfield's party ultimately came together to take up his unfinished mantle, things like total equality for freed slaves, ridding politics of a corrupt spoils system, and education for all. important stuff, stuff that our party should be proud of. for all the hand wringing over the inevitable civil war within the current gop, things aren't nearly as bad as garfield had it, but it's up to conservatives to do what they failed to do over the past four years. it's not enough to merely say that conservative policies are better. we have to say why. why is keeping more of your own money better for women and young people? why is legal immigration ultimately more economically empowering for hispanics than

blanket amnesty? why is sweeping entitlement reform going to protect baby boomers down the road? why is ex panding welfare programs increased poverty and widened income inequality? this is our heavy lift. we have to show why conservatism is more compassionate, more effective, and healthier for our economic future. party isn't doomed or hopeless or at war as some prominent conservative voices have bemoaned. it just needs to remember what made it great in the first place. okay. that's does it for me and the rest of us at "the cycle." martin, it's all yours. >> thanks, s.e., and good afternoon. it's tuesday, november the 13th. unlucky for some. a sex scandal and general chaos. >> there are still many unanswered questions. >> fbi agents are currently at the home of paula broadwell. >> marine general john allen exchanged thousands of pages of